Research for Personnel Classification Tests

Syndicate content
On Some Issues in the Accelerated CAT-ASVAB Project
November 1, 1986
The Accelerated Computerized Adaptive Testing (CAT) - Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) Project (ACAP) may serve as the pilot version for national implementation of CAT for the ASVAB. Two major decisions in the ACAP involve the introduction of new items into the tests, and setting time limits. This research memorandum takes the position that the long-term benefits which CAT may provide are more important than purely technical concerns and makes recommendations based on this position.
Read More | Download Report
Evaluating the Appropriateness of the Numerical Operations and Math Knowledge Subtests in the AFQT
November 1, 1986
The Numerical Operation (NO) subtest, used in the Armed Forces Qualification Test (AFQT), has a history of causing problems for the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) score scale. Two adjustments to the ASVAB score scale have been required since NO was made part of the AFQT in 1980. The purpose of this report is to present evidence that the NO subtest should be deleted from the AFQT and be replaced by the Math Knowledge (MK) subtest. Data are presented showing that the AFQT scores in 1984 were inflated by approximately three percentile score points.
Read More | Download Report
Towards Justifying Enlistment Standards: Linking Input Characteristics to Job Performance
October 1, 1986
The Job Performance Measurement Project has broken new ground by embarking on the large-scale development and administration of hands-on job performance tests. In the next stage, this pioneering effort can go even futher in helping to rationalize the selection and classification process by evaluating the cost-effectiveness of enlistment standards. This paper outlines a process for such an evaluation.
Read More | Download Report
From Hands-On Measurement to Job Performance: The Issue of Generalizability
October 1, 1986
The generalization from hands-on test scores to performance in a military occupation specialty can be threatened by many potential sources of error within the measurement process. Such sources of error can include scoring inconsistencies by test administrators, testing over a long period, and diverse test content. This analysis estimates the influence of these factors on the hands-on scores for three Marine Corps specialties. Estimates of test reliability are discussed in light of the effect the measurement factors on the hands-on scores. Research designs to assess specific issues of reliability are proposed for the full-scale administration of hands-on tests to the Infantry occupational field.
Read More | Download Report
The Rand Cost-Performance Model for Setting Qualification Standards: Preliminary Comments
September 1, 1986
The Rand Corporation has developed a model to determine cost-effective qualification standards for military occupational specialties. Since this model may potentially have an impact on enlistment policy, it is important to fully understand its assumptions and procedures. The research memorandum examines key elements of the model, discusses the impact they have on the outcome of the model, and identifies issues that might benefit from further analysis.
Read More | Download Report
The Impact of the Adjusted Scaling of ASVAB Forms 11, 12, and 13
September 1, 1986
New scales for Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) forms 11, 12, and 13 have been implemented. This research memorandum describes the impact of this adjusted scaling on scores for FY 1985 Marine Corps applicants. In addition, the initial and adjusted scalings for each ASVAB subtest are compared.
Read More | Download Report
Validity of the ASVAB for Predicting Performance in Marine Corps Training Courses: Gender Differences
August 1, 1986
Females tend to have higher performance than males in clerical and food services training courses, when aptitude scores are held constant. To help account for the differences, educational level and interest in clerical-type activities are included in this analysis, along with aptitude composite scores. A recommendation is made about adjusting aptitude qualifying scores for females.
Read More | Download Report
Determining the Sensitivity of CAT-ASVAB Scores to Changes in Item Response Curves with the Medium of Administration
August 1, 1986
Within a few years the Department of Defense may begin administering the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) using Computerized Adaptive Testing (CAT). In CAT, each test item is characterized by an Item Response Curve (IRC), which describes how the probability of correctly answering the item increases with ability. A recent study conducted by the Center for Naval Analyses found that IRCs of many items in the experimental CAT item pool for the ASVAB changed substantially from paper-pencil to CAT administration. This research memorandum examines the effects of these changes on scores of individual examinees.
Read More | Download Report
The ASVAB Score Scales: 1980 and World War II
July 1, 1986
This report describes the construction of a new score scale for the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB). The ASVAB was administered to a nationally representative sample of young adults in the fall of 1980. The test scores for this sample were used to construct the new score scale, called the 1980 ASVAB score scale. On 1 October 1984, the 1980 score scale replaced the World War II scale, used by the Department of Defense (DoD) since 1950. The new score scale provides nationally representative test norms that enable DoD personnel and manpower managers to compare the aptitudes of military recruits with those of the potential supply of recruits in the civilian youth population.
Read More | Download Report
Confirming Differences in Relative-Value Proficiency Marks
July 1, 1986
Knowing the magnitude of performance differences among individuals is critical in making personnel decisions in the Marine Corps. Recent research at the Center for Naval Analyses has focused on quantifying the magnitude of these performance differences. The purpose of this analysis was to cross-validate those results using hands-on measures of job performance and other published research findings.
Read More | Download Report